Dear All, quite an interesting discussion is going on here. I agree with Mr. Hussain that we must maintain decorum of language. What I understood from Mr. Dinesh Pillai's post is that he was just communicating from his heart without evaluating his boss on the whole. Before we respond to Mr. Dinesh Pillai, we should find out "what made him post such comments about his boss." We need to understand Mr. Dinesh Pillai but not his boss. I am sure this will help us to guide all those members seeking appropriate inputs from us.
Our replies should be based on Mr. Dinesh Pillai's inputs. Mr. Simhans' approach, dealing with members for acquiring relevant information, is quite practical, and I truly appreciate it because it's a really productive, realistic, and practical approach. This approach has bridged the gap between the seeker and adviser, resulting in productive discussions.
Mr. Hussain, it's definitely not all about taking revenge but the outcome of the relationship between boss and employee. It is the responsibility of the boss to maintain a healthy and positive relationship with his/her employees rather than making them feel that "he/she is just a boss - demonstrating the sign of superiority and his/her powers." This reflects the organization's work culture as well.
A boss cannot be compared with mother nature in any way.
I agree with Mr. Simhan, upward feedback, or a 360-degree appraisal about the boss will reveal much more than everything if it is allowed anonymously. A good sign of a good boss will listen and accept criticism, in whatever shape it may be. This is the best way to understand his team.
Ms. (Cite Contribution) had pointed out the right attributes of attitude/behavior - affable and receptive, associated with good leadership skills.
One thing I had noted is that none of us likes to mess up with the boss because he is the boss, but why don't we take it in a positive sense to make him a better leader because bosses fall under the management category, therefore:
1) Management has to have mastery of techniques/strategies. Leadership has only one task, i.e., empowering/encouraging/motivating/uplifting/nourishing people. Combining the two is effectiveness!
2) Leadership positions are not merely roles of power. It's an obligation to help/empower/encourage/motivate/uplift/nourish people to be successful and happy.
3) Bosses should act before they speak and think before they act because actions have more volume than words.
4) Bosses have an attitude problem as their positive attitudes must serve them primarily, making themselves and their team feel encouraged/empowered.
5) The biggest problem I had noted in bosses is that "they take everything for granted just for being a boss."
I recollect Mr. Dinesh Divekar's efforts as he had met more than 100 M.D.'s and found their attitudes in common. I really wonder:
- Why is it difficult for employees to motivate their bosses positively?
- Why are we employees failing to motivate our bosses?
- A boss can speak anything against his/her employee, but an employee can't. Don't you all feel this is strange? I feel that it's not a balanced work culture between boss and employee.
- Why don't bosses think without a superiority complex?
There are many queries that need to be answered by the boss himself, but I don't know whether he/she will love to listen to such queries. I wish we could eliminate the word boss and replace it with leader; that should change the whole scenario. This is what I feel, and I hope in many organizations transformation is in progress.
Rather than discussing among ourselves, let's focus on Mr. Dinesh Pillai and get the objective done of this forum.
Have a nice day, and do correct me if I am wrong.
With profound regards